[Deleted by user.]

Yes he was a sort of cross over fighter.
He held a lot in the then conventional way, but when he opened up he looked devastating.
I suspect he was also extremely strong.
Imagine him today.

 

Jack Johnson was fantastic, but his style was probably about as far away from modern as any heavyweight champion we have on film.

 

You would be on pretty safe ground saying Joe Gans.

Anything earlier becomes hard to interpret.

 

He'd be a terror. Strong, crafty and intelligent. His uppercut was a nasty weapon apparently.

 

Yep I agree with that but johnson definitely changed boxing. He was different from all those before him.
A one of a kind.

 

I was going to say the same thing. Tommy Burns' fights can be a fun watch. I really like the Burns-Moir fight. Burns has good defensive footwork. Jabs well. Throws hard shots with good balance.

What's interesting is he lost his title to a guy who I don't think looks modern at all, in Jack Johnson.

One of those, one step forward (Burns), two steps (Johnson and Willard) back scenarios.

 

Gans may not have won the heavyweight championship tho.

 

Dempsey and Gene Tunney...

 

If in doubt, read the thread title!

 

Dempsey

 

Has to be Corbett .. three minute rounds. Gloves. A ring. No wrestling.

 

It is not impossible that there were bareknuckle fighters who looked quite like a modern fighter, even if there were regarded as being unconventional at the time.

There were probably an enormous number of technical variations among fighters, then as now.

 

He has yet to be born.

 

You could chose any five fighters from the 21st century, and if they were the only five that you had film of, then you would still be missing out on a lot!

 

Gets us all at times that's for sure.